First, then, we have to consider the principles and effects of the exchanges of commodities which are in no degree luxuries.
If the members of one society, having before had no intercourse with some other society, become aware that in it there is a commodity of this sort, of which they would desire to have a supply, the question to be determined is, will they procure that supply, and if so, what will be the effect thence resulting.As they have hitherto done without the commodity, they must already possess some substitute for it.They will then only seek to procure it, if they can procure it for less labor than the substitute they already possess; and if they can procure it for less labor they will naturally be excited to do so.Were coal, for instance, the commodity which the.
members of one society A possess, and of which the members of another society B wish to procure a supply, there must in B be some means in existence, of more or less fully and easily satisfying the wants which that mineral can supply.It may be, for instance, that wood is the fuel there consumed.
Let us suppose that three cords of the wood commonly burnt, are equivalent, in the heat given out by them, to one chaldron of coals; if, then, in the society B there be any commodity there equivalent to less than three cords wood, and which, transported to A, will in A be equivalent, considered as an utility, to one chaldron coals, the exchange will be possible, for this difference may pay, or may do more than pay, for the expense of transport.
If, for example, in the society A timber for architectural purposes be more scarce than in B, it might happen that the wood used for fuel in B, when transported to A in logs, would be in estimation there.It might be that in A, owing to the general application of the soil to agricultural purposes, and the scarcity of forest, a quantity of timber, fit for the use of the builder, such as might be got out of a cord of the fire wood used in B, might exchange for one chaldron coals.Were, then, an individual of the society B, to transport to A a quantity of square timber equivalent in B to three hundred cords of wood, he might exchange it there for three hundred chaldrons coals, and might so return to B with a commodity there equivalent to nine hundred cords of fire wood, thrice the amount which he had transported from thence.Suppose that the expense of the transport of both commodities is equal to three hundred cords, then he will just have doubled the stock embarked in the enterprise.Were this the state of things, timber, instead of being consumed in fuel in B, would be transferred to A, and would return, in the form of coals, an equivalent, after paying the charges of transport, to double the labor expended in its formation.
But in this state of things the whole advantage would fall to the society B; fuel would be more easily obtained there, but timber would not be more easily obtained in A.As, however, it would be equally in the power of the members of the latter society to send their coals to B, and there exchange them for wood, were other circumstances wanting, this alone would have the effect of equalizing the advantages, and in most cases, therefore, they would come to be nearly equally divided between two societies so situated.
The first effects, therefore, would be that the same quantity of fuel which before cost in B three days' labor might now be obtained for two; and that the quantity of building timber that in A cost three days' labor, might also be obtained for two.The revolution effected might nearly compare to an improvement in both societies, by which, in the one, two cords fire wood might give equal heat to what three bad done, and, in the other, two logs of timber might serve the same purposes as three.Like other improvements, they would not be confined in their operation to the particular branches of industry in which they had place, but would be diffused equally over both societies, carrying the whole instruments in each towards the more quickly returning orders.Profits would rise equally in all employments.
The absolute capital of both communities would be increased in proportion to the augmented provision made for their future wants.This provision, indeed, would be so far uncertain, that it might be rendered inaccessible by war, or other causes interrupting the commerce between the two countries;and the whole industry and instruments engaged in it might, therefore, be compared to a stock engaged in some hazardous branch of industry, and running a chance of being wholly or partially lost, by the action of uncontrollably destructive causes.Abstracting, however, the chances to which they might thus be exposed, they would embody as real a provision for futurity as any other part of the stock of either society.
In all exchanges taking place between different societies, in commodities which are not luxuries, similar principles regulating them, and similar effects flowing from them, may be traced.For, if they derive their value not from the gratification they afford to vanity, but from their capacity to supply real wants, they may be compared with other instruments belonging to the society, satisfying more or less perfectly the same class of wants.
And when, through the exchange of other commodities for them, they can be obtained for less labor than such instruments, will naturally come to be so obtained, and completely or partially fill the place of them.As coals will compare with cord wood, so Indian rubber will compare with leather, New Zealand weed with hempen cordage, slates with thatch, copper with iron.
In these cases, and in others where probably mere utility is sought for, there are means of comparing one thing with another, and the substitution of the one for the other, when in proportion to the labor necessary to obtain it, it will more effectually supply future wants, is always a real improvement.
